The term 'signing address' is used several places within -base, so it
might warrant being defined in section 2. Since the first mention of it
is in the introduction, I'd propose that we add a forward reference in
the introduction. So the second paragraph of section 1.2 would become:
INFORMATIVE RATIONALE: The signing address (defined in Section 2.x)
associated with a DKIM signature is not required to match a particular
header field because of the broad methods of interpretation by recipient
mail systems, including MUAs.
And then add the following new section, probably after 2.2:
2.x Signing Address
The signing address for a given signature is the address specified by
the i= value of its DKIM-Signature header field, or in the absence of
the i= tag, by its default value as specified in the description of the
i= tag in Section 3.5.
How does this work for everyone?
-Jim
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html